Be honest: Do the OT rules to end games need changing?

[Betterthanmost]

I don't understand the argument against letting both offenses have a chance regardless of what happens after the first offense scores a TD. If we allow it for a field goal, why can't we allow it for a TD? Does this makes sense to anybody esle?

 

[RedSleevesPinkStripes]

I think they are fine and liked the recent change to require a TD over a FG.

The only fix I would do is replace the random coin flip with some other metric that relates to how the game was going. I don't know what it would be, maybe whomever had longer TOP or more total yards would get to choose to receive/kick first. But I'm nitpicking at this point.

Interesting concept, I would be cool with something like that, that way people can't complain about the "randomness" of a coin flip.. the team would have earned their OT status during regulation... hmmmm

 

[chasa]

the rules were already changed. they are good how they are now. stop the other team from getting a TD if you want a possession.

 

[Gronk]

I prefer the new format to the full sudden death format. I don’t like the coin flip aspect of the NFL...I’d rather just go to home team kicks off first in beginning of regulation and OT, in regular season there is NO overtime it’s jusr a tie (I think this would force interesting choices on coaches) and in playoffs it’s 10-minute periods until someone is ahead.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

In the playoffs, college OT rules should apply

 

[QuantumMechanic]

In the playoffs, college OT rules should apply

College OT rules are an abomination.

And if you still feel the inexplicable feel the need to import that abomination to the NFL, have the offense start on its own 25 instead of the defense's 25.

 

[TB12GOATQB]

Hate to be political here but this sounds like 1 political party wanting to change 250 years of our electoral college voting process because they dont like the outcome.

We all know if the chiefs had won on opening TD in OT we wouldnt have heard a GD word about it. Now its all over social media.

 

[SVN]

I liked the older rule as well. Play defense.

 

[TB_Helmet]

If they changed it so that each team got the ball regardless of what the first team did, there’d be a lot more ties, which would suck.

 

[TB12GOATQB]

When people mention college FB I hope they just mean both teams get possession....the scripted setup at whatever yard line is gimmicky and reminds me of the horrid soccer and hockey penalty shootouts.

 

[bormio]

I don't understand the argument against letting both offenses have a chance regardless of what happens after the first offense scores a TD. If we allow it for a field goal, why can't we allow it for a TD? Does this makes sense to anybody esle?

Big advantage to the second team. They would know if they have to go for all 4th downs - giving them an extra play. This way there is an advantage to going first (win with a TD) and one to going second (get a stop, win with a FG).

 

[bormio]

When people mention college FB I hope they just mean both teams get possession....the scripted setup at whatever yard line is gimmicky and reminds me of the horrid soccer and hockey penalty shootouts.

Once again - big advantage to going second

 

[Patriot Missile]

Not when you have Slater calling the coin toss

 

[obgod3]

I dont think so....even if they did then someone would come up with another reason to change even after another change...its a never ending cycle and there is no answer to it

 

[Deus Irae]

Yes.

They need to go back to what it was before. This whole "FGs don't really count" setup they have now was a foolish caving to public whining.

And, for those who want to cry "But Brady!", the response is simply "But Saints/Rams".

 

[sambam94]

2 sides to the ball..if a defense can't stop a team from marching 75 yards, you lose....period.

 

[Joey007]

No, the current OT rules are fine as they are. Don't want to lose with your offense never having gotten a shot? Just stop them from scoring a TD.

They had THREE third and long situations to stop us.

They had plenty of chances.

 

[Joey007]

Yes.

They need to go back to what it was before. This whole "FGs don't really count" setup they have now was a foolish caving to public whining.

Eh, nah the FG OT setup was overdoing it.

A team having a nice kick return, followed by the offense moving 25 yards leading to a game winning FG, has not done enough to win an OT game in walk off fashion.

What Brady and the offense did last night, however, was enough to warrant a walk off.

 

[Family]

Two suggested changes:

1) Eliminate coin toss and give the ball to the road team first. If you play 60 minutes at home and can not win, the other team deserves this break.

2) You only have three downs to get a first down. Force the team with the ball to kick on 4th down. If you need to score a TD to win, the other team has only three downs for a first, and then game over..

 

[qbno12]

I don't think the rules needs to change. Chiefs defense should have made a stop. If I am not mistaken (I haven't watched the game), Pats converted three 3rd and longs on the scoring drive in OT. Any of those three plays could have ended up in 4th down and would have give chiefs the ball back.

Andy Reid not calling timeouts to help out Chiefs' D didn't help their cause either.